"Death Panels" in Britain?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

The Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html)

This leads to some interesting questions, not the least of which being the effect of this on the US healthcare debate.

[Fragony]

Legalize euthanesia so they can decide for theirselves when they can still talk, tada.

[jabarto]

"Death Panels" are nothing more than blatant scaremongering by the political right. Consider this:

Private insurance companies have entire departments of people whose sole job is to investigate a person's background and find a reason to disqualify them from their coverage. I'm not kidding. They will literally search for a reason not to pay out. In fact, you have a 50% chance of having your coverage dropped in the event of a life-threatening emergency.

Let me repeat that: the insurance companies have entire teams of people who will fabricate reasons not to provide the service they're being paid for. IT IS LITERALLY IN THEIR BEST INTERSTS FOR PEOPLE TO DIE RATHER THAN LIVE.

The reason for this is simple. Private comanies are, by definition, profit driven. Why would the government, who *does* have a vested interest in the health of the citizens, have any reason to kill them in the manner described in the article? Preposterous.

[Tribesman]

In fact, you have a 50% chance of having your coverage dropped in the event of a life-threatening emergency.

Hold on , I thought that was only a 32% chance.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html)

This leads to some interesting questions, not the least of which being the effect of this on the US healthcare debate.

Troubling, but if they have already been diagnosed as terminal then it's going to be mostly hastening the inevitable. However, these overzealous practices have been going on for years, even before this. In Southhampton, they were litterally killing off the old people in one ward. That was deliberate and disgusting, this seems more about carelessness.

So, not as bad as it makes out, and in fact the article is no where near as imflamatory as the headline.

[naut]

"Death Panels" are nothing more than blatant scaremongering by the political right.
Well it is the Torygraph. :balloon2:

[Furunculus]

"Death Panels" are nothing more than blatant scaremongering by the political right. Consider this:

Private insurance companies have entire departments of people whose sole job is to investigate a person's background and find a reason to disqualify them from their coverage. I'm not kidding. They will literally search for a reason not to pay out. In fact, you have a 50% chance of having your coverage dropped in the event of a life-threatening emergency.

Let me repeat that: the insurance companies have entire teams of people who will fabricate reasons not to provide the service they're being paid for. IT IS LITERALLY IN THEIR BEST INTERSTS FOR PEOPLE TO DIE RATHER THAN LIVE.

The reason for this is simple. Private comanies are, by definition, profit driven. Why would the government, who *does* have a vested interest in the health of the citizens, have any reason to kill them in the manner described in the article? Preposterous.

that is a ridiculous statement, because UK doctors and clinical policy has nothing to do with america, regardless of whether they are right or left.

if there is an editorial bent to this story it is fact that the telegraph seems to have a slight catholic leaning among senior editorial staff, who would disapprove of anything that smacks of euthanasia.

but this really is a non party political issue.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

that is a ridiculous statement, because UK doctors and clinical policy has nothing to do with america, regardless of whether they are right or left.

if there is an editorial bent to this story it is fact that the telegraph seems to have a slight catholic leaning among senior editorial staff, who would disapprove of anything that smacks of euthanasia.

but this really is a non party political issue.

You've noticed this too? There's a certain perverse glee whenever they think the Anglican Church might be in trouble, isn't there?

[Furunculus]

yup, and i am naturally a lot more sympathetic to CofE than i ever am to the catholic church, but given that i'm not religious it doesn't really matter to me.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

yup, and i am naturally a lot more sympathetic to CofE than i ever am to the catholic church, but given that i'm not religious it doesn't really matter to me.

Well to be fair, they've not got it in for Dr Williams like the Times does.

Americans, witness the British Media.

[Rhyfelwyr]

The Jesuits are everywhere, first of all they sink the Titanic and now this.

Anyway, wouldn't the government have the same interest as companies in cutting lives short, cost-cutting basically?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The Jesuits are everywhere, first of all they sink the Titanic and now this.

Anyway, wouldn't the government have the same interest as companies in cutting lives short, cost-cutting basically?

Well, the Government also takes in taxes and therefore has a vested interest in getting people back to work.

Also, Jesuits are on average better educated than you or I, you wouldn't be here without them.:beam:

[rory_20_uk]

Ah, trying to effectively allocate resources. What a dirty concept... :wall:

~:smoking:

[jabarto]

that is a ridiculous statement, because UK doctors and clinical policy has nothing to do with america, regardless of whether they are right or left.


This leads to some interesting questions, not the least of which being the effect of this on the US healthcare debate.

Besides, this argument is made all the time, and it's a big reason why we can't get any meaningful reform in this country. People honestly think this is what healthcare reform will lead to, so this kind of stuff is very much relevant over here. That's the point I was trying to get across, moreso than any particular vitriol towords the right.


Hold on , I thought that was only a 32% chance.

Possibly. I don't have my sources right in front of me, you see. But it's still repugnant any way you look at it.